similar to: [Dominators] Faster EXPENSIVE_CHECKS builds

Hello, I'm trying to run checks with EXPENSIVE_CHECKS enabled, but it crashes when generating some intrinsics file with TableGen. > cd /home/luke/Source/llvm-project/build && /home/luke/Source/llvm- > project/build/bin/llvm-tblgen -gen-intrinsic-impl -I /home/luke/Source/llvm- > project/llvm/include/llvm/IR -I /home/luke/Source/llvm-project/llvm/include >

Hi folks, For the past month I’ve been working on improving the DominatorTree and PostDominatorTree in LLVM. The RFC that explains the motivations and plans can be found here: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-June/114045.html . Here’s a short summary of what changed upstream since posting it: - We switched from the Simple Lengauer-Tarjan algorithm for computing dominators

Hi Chijun, Great, seems like you did a lot of progress and understand the issues quite well! I have done some early sketch on the API of the new updater class. > From my current understanding, to solve the fragmentation problem of > the API, the new class first, need to maintain the DomTree and > PostDomTree class and deprecate the DefferredDominance class. > There are a couple of

Hi Chijun, I left you my feedback in the doc (+ some nitpicks). Overall, it looks very solid and shows you understand the problem well and know what to expect. Your proposed timeline is reasonable and I don't see any major things to improve there. Don't hesitate to reach out if you have any questions related to my comments (either here or in the document). Thanks, Kuba On Wed, Mar 21,

Hi Kuba, Thanks for your feedback. I have made some improvements on the proposal according to your feedback and clarify something on the time availability. I left comments on the questions you asked in the doc. Please check it out. Thanks, Chijun 2018-03-22 10:37 GMT+08:00 Jakub (Kuba) Kuderski <kubakuderski at gmail.com>: > Hi Chijun, > > I left you my feedback in the doc (+

On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 at 22:24, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > I appreciate the value of the feature - but it's possible the test > doesn't pull its weight. Is the code that implements the feature > liable to failure/often touched? If it's pretty static/failure is > unlikely, possibly the time and flaky failures aren't worth the value > of

Hi Tobias, 1) Daniel and Chandler have for a long time been talking about computing > dominance and post-dominance in one shot to reduce the cost of > post-dominance and make it (freely) available everywhere. Is this > covered by your current (or planned) work? I'm not sure what you exactly mean by one shot; I'll ask around tomorrow. I wanted to play a little bit with your

Btw, here is another interesting paper about post-dominators and control dependence: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/cbb2/9a0e4895025bd9df24f9263217df12f1ed1e.pdf I think a great outcome of your internship would be some precise documentation regarding the guarantees the LLVM dominators give -- possibly also considering classic and weak control dependence and the difference between

Hi Chijun, Thanks for your interest in the project. I have gone through most of the LLVM Kaleidoscope tutorial and I have > watched the video of the presentation “Dominator Trees and incremental > updates that transcend time” presented on the 2017 LLVM Developers’ > Meeting. I have also started to understand the algorithm mentioned in > the comments of the code related to the

Hi Kuba, Thanks for your advice in your previous letter. During last week, I have read the documents on Doxygen and the source code of the DomTreeBase/DomTree/PostDomTree/DeferredDominance class, I believe now I have a much better understanding on the relationship between these classes and how DeferredDominance class performs lazy updates. I have also learnt the current usage and drawbacks of

Hi Kuba, Thanks for your clarification on the project in the previous letter. I have submitted a proposal draft at the GSoC website, the draft has been shared with the LLVM organization. I will appreciate it if you can give me some advice on the proposal. This draft can be viewed by the organization. (If you do not have access, please mail me, and I will give you the link.) I am looking forward

Thanks for noticing this, Geoff. I just landed r268050 which add a cmake option for this (and unifies XDEBUG and EXPENSIVE_CHECKS). This might make it easier to setup some build bots. Thank you, Filipe On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 8:40 PM, Geoff Berry via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Bugs filed: > 27488 <https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=27488> librarie

I'm not sure what gave me this idea, but I decided to comment out the swap partition in /etc/fstab and reboot my laptop. I did not run swapoff directly at any time. I'm running more things now than I would ever dream of to hammer my 500MB of memory, but I still notice NO slowdown. This is the best desktop experience I've ever had for any OS on any hardware! Here's the first 12

Hi folks, This summer I'm working on improving dominators during my internship at Google. Below is an RFC on switching to dynamic dominators, which you can also read as a Google Doc <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wPYeWykeO51YDPLYQEg4KNTlDIGIdyF65OTfhSMaNHQ/edit?usp=sharing> if you prefer so. Please let us know what you think. ~Kuba

I'm running into a memory problem when trying to switch some web servers that are running centos4.8/x86_64 to centos5.5/x86_64. The new servers running centos5.5 are using a decent amount more memory than the centos4.8 servers. Here's an example from top: --- centos 5.5 --- $ uname -a Linux ws51 2.6.18-194.17.1.el5 #1 SMP Wed Sep 29 12:50:31 EDT 2010 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

Greetings.! In rapid action frames, I see lots of small rectangles which many together render a choppy sense of motion. I've attached screenshots in attempts to convey what I mean: http://24.16.26.121/screenshots/images/1253914810.jpg http://24.16.26.121/screenshots/images/1253914788.jpg I understand the lack of h/w acceleration and such, but I feel this can go away. If I am at all

Hey everyone. I''ve got a best practices question. How are you guys rendering newsfeeds? We have a couple of apps where we send newsfeed items from a backend process. As such, we aren''t in the context of a controller and can''t use the rails template rendering. We''ve tried about 3 different ways to make that bearable, but aren''t having much

I''m noticing some long delays when optimizing my index. I know this is terribly inefficient, but in order to make sure that my ActiveRecord model is in sync with my index, I''m optimizing after every new record that I store, like so: class Resume < ActiveRecord::Base include Ferret has_and_belongs_to_many :users SEARCH_INDEX = File.dirname(__FILE__) +

Hey there everybody. I am new to the list, so bear with me if make mistakes :) I updated my Server from FC7 to FC9 and with it came Samba 3.2.0pre3-9.fc9 (heaven knows why it had to be a pre version). I reused my old config and noticed that displaying all hosts in my workgroup as well as authentication went from normal to awfully slow. Once the connection is established it is bearable, though

r327219 added a new wrapper function called *llvm::sort*. If EXPENSIVE_CHECKS is enabled, llvm::sort will randomly shuffle the container before invoking std::sort. This will help uncover non-deterministic ordering of objects having the same key. All occurrences of std::sort have been changed to llvm::sort in llvm/clang/polly repos. Going forward please make sure to avoid use of std::sort and